PATIENCE: A look at Michael Ball...- Page 4

[kec]

Posted: 10/9/05 at 4:46pm

"Did you all know that the orchestra sit facing the stage slightly so they can also watch what is happening and also the conductor?"

I was sitting in the front row when I saw Patience for the last time, and could see the orchestra pretty well -- when I wasn't watching the stage that is The orchestra set-up was pretty much standard -- a sort of a semi-circle facing the conductor. I did notice that at least one member of the orchestra, sitting on the left side of the stage, kept getting up to see the action on the stage .

[sharon1]

Posted: 10/9/05 at 5:16pm

All I know is Mr.Wedow made reference of this to me. I may have misunderstood, but I don't think so. Maybe this was just for the last performance. So everyone could be part of the action so to speak.

[kec]

Posted: 10/9/05 at 5:23pm

No worries, Sharon, I was just commenting on what I saw on the 17th. I did think it was kind of neat/funny that this one musican kept standing up and/or craning his neck to see the on-stage action.
Updated On: 10/9/05 at 05:23 PM

Posted: 10/9/05 at 5:38pm

I listened to my recording of PATIENCE today, made by D'O,ly Carte Opera, and marveled at how much faster the brighter were the tempi. I liked the NYCOpera production very, very much, and loved the Ball-Burdette performances. I think the tempi could have been faster. I would love to see a production by D'Oyly Carte at the Savoy, if possible. I saw their MIKADO there and it was exquisite.

[kec]

Posted: 10/9/05 at 6:08pm

A friend who saw the NYC Opera production the same day I did told me at the interval that she thought the songs were way too slow, especially the Colonel's song about the dragoons(which I quoted above). My friend told me after the second act that the songs were much faster in the second act, especially the duet between Grosvenor and Bunthorne.

Posted: 10/9/05 at 6:15pm

Your friend is correct.

The first act at NYCO was slow. The second picked up quite a bit.

I thought that it was designed and stage extremely well. I like very much the single revolving set.

[sharon1]

Posted: 10/9/05 at 6:52pm

I have been thinking about all the reasons the production impressed me so much, not including Michael Ball, who was great. The reason I am sure is the staging and the scenery. The set was simplisitic but elegant and beautiful. It was the purity I think that I most like. It was, for lack of a better term, clean. Almost pristine. It just worked so well, or appeared to work well for the cast and the audience alike. It was a case where you were looking at the performers at every moment instead of the scenery and gimmicks. I know that I can't wait for my next adventure with the NYCOpera.

Posted: 10/9/05 at 7:08pm

Agreed, Sharon.

I'm going to plan to see MOST HAPPY FELLA there in the Spring. I've never seen a production and I am very fond of the score.

[sharon1]

Posted: 10/9/05 at 7:15pm

If this production is any indication, it should be a very good one. I have to mention this. I was really pleased to see people of all ages at the performances I went to. Some one Some where said, "This is not your grandfathers Gilbert and Sullivan". That was so true.

[kec]

Posted: 10/10/05 at 9:20am

"I thought that it was designed and stage extremely well. I like very much the single revolving set."

I agree. It did work very well, especially in the scene between Lady Jane and Bunthorne, when she "pushes" the building around to show the artist's studio. The look on Michael's face in that scene was priceless!

"I would love to see a production by D'Oyly Carte at the Savoy, if possible. I saw their MIKADO there and it was exquisite."

On my last trip to London, I visited the Theatre Museum in Covent Garden, which was having an exhibit of Al Hirschfield's drawings, titled Brits on Broadway. As I wandered around the museum, I came upon a section about the Savoy and how the first production staged there was Patience. Quite interesting.

[sharon1]

Posted: 10/10/05 at 10:28am

You are so right. The scene where she pushes the "building" around is priceless. It always amazes me how great performers, Myrna and Michael, can make such a simple scene so absolutely perfect. Don't you love being able to relate to theatre history. I envy you your visit to the Theatre Museum.

[Lori]

Posted: 10/11/05 at 11:00am

LOL, the comment about it not being your father's Gilbert and Sullivan was mine Sharon (made on another board to a skeptical non-G&S fan).

For anyone who's interested...if you follow this link and fast forward 20 minutes into the show you can hear a track from Michael Ball's new CD "Music" to be released in the UK Oct 17th (the link is only good for a few more days).

His cover of Queen's "The Show Must Go On"

http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio/aod/networks/cleveland/aod.shtml?cleveland/songs_shows

Updated On: 10/11/05 at 11:00 AM

[kissmycookie]

Posted: 10/11/05 at 11:06am

NYCO's production could also be seen as the set counterpoint of "Patience" which was a reaction to the aesthetic movement. A return to simplicity (in addition to NYCO's wonderful ability to do more with less, for scenery, costumes, etc. with many of their productions)

[sharon1]

Posted: 10/11/05 at 11:51am

Lori
At least I quoted correctly. Thank Goodness. I do love his rendition of "The Show Must Go On". It has so much passion. And KMC I think yo may be right about the production. I really think someone did their homework on this one.

[kissmycookie]

Posted: 10/11/05 at 12:13pm

well, it's also continuing City Opera's tradition of sparer but beautifully effective sets. Mark Lamos' production of Madame Butterfly is perfectly representative of City Opera's aesthetics. It just seem perfect for City Opera to work Patience in with their own aestheics, given how G&S were satirizing the Aesthetic movement....